Another important chapter in the austerity revolutionDialogue with the Alter Ego on the UK election results, drafted and published on May 9, 2015-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question by Alter Ego of Noah denkt™ (AE): The outcome of the parliamentary elections in the United Kingdom on May 7 has stunned everyone. While opinion polls consistently projected a hung and fractioned parliament, UK voters, in a surprise last minute swing, provided Prime Minister Cameron’s Conservative Party with an absolute, 4 seat majority. At the same time, the Liberal Democrats, the Tory coalition partner in the previous government lost a staggering 49 seats and saw their representation in the House of Commons reduced to 8. The list of high profile Lib Dem candidates who were castigated by voters included cabinet members Vince Cable, Danny Alexander and Ed Davey as well as the former Lib Dem boss Charles Kennedy. While retaining his seat in Parliament, Nick Clegg has already handed in his resignation as Lib Dem leader. Likewise, Labour leader Ed Miliband and UKIP boss Nigel Farage have also resigned from their party positions. Labour’s disappointing result was particularly devastating in its former Scottish stronghold. Miliband's party lost 40 seats there including that of Scottish leader Jim Murphy and that of shadow foreign minister Douglas Alexander. The Scottish National Party, however, won a landslide 56 out of total of 59 seats in Scotland. Clearly a remarkable and tide turning outcome. What is it in Noah denkt™’s opinion that happened here? Why did the pollsters get it so wrong?

Answer by Noah denkt™ (Nd): Well, the polls correctly predicted the landslide SNP victory in Scotland. And they also anticipated correctly that Liberal Democrats would have a terrible election night. If they didn't foresee the Cameron win adequately then that may have something to do with the fact that they underestimated the impact which the last BBC Question Time Debate had on voter opinion. It seems to us that Ed Miliband's failure to accept that Labour overspent the last time they were in government must have rubbed many people the wrong way. Generally speaking though, this election was first and foremost a national referendum on austerity politics. And in the confinement of the voting booth, voters probably realized that the tough cost cutting of the Cameron government is very likely the more responsible way to deal with the challenges of the future than the tax-and spend-approach that Labour and others were advocating for.

AE: Yes, we are aware that this project is firmly anchored in the pro-austerity camp!

AE: If what you say is true why then did the electorate punish the Liberal Democrats in such a brutal manner? They, after all, did support Mr. Cameron’s downsizing of protectionist government tasks? Should they not have been rewarded for their courage too?

Nd: It is natural that voters while accepting the need for reasonable hardship also want to express their frustration over the pain that subject hardship is causing them. That is why they have castigated the weakest link in the political austerity chain without undoing the austerity approach as a whole.

AE: And what about the rise of the Scottish National Party?

Nd: Well, unfortunately, there are still a lot of people out there who stubbornly oppose the notion that times have changed and that the old social welfare philosophy sadly isn't tenable any more in the current (“Uber”) circumstances. The SNP is part of that crop. So, if you add to that mix the fact that a lot of Scots probably needed to make amends for rejecting the earlier independence vote then you might have an explanation for the SNP sweep in Scotland.

AE: Nevertheless it cannot be denied that there is a serious North-South divide over the need for government austerity in the UK?

Nd: Correct. As in all major, if not revolutionary, paradigm shifts there is a deep division over which way to go. That is normal and healthy. And it is exhilarating that despite all the pain, the British public has ultimately decided to do the right and reasonable thing. Others, in Greece, Italy and elsewhere should take note of that.

Reminder: Noah denkt™ is a project of Wilhelm ("Wil") Leonards and his Landei Selbstverlag (WL & his LSV). Consequently, all rights to the texts that have been published under the Noah denkt™brand name are reserved by WL & his LSV.

The commentary and the reasoning that was provided on this page is for informational and/or educational purposes only and it is not intended to provide tax, legal or investment advice. It should therefore not be construed as an offer to sell, a solicitation of an offer to buy, or a recommendation for any security or any issuer by WL & his LSV or its Noah denkt™ Project. In fact, WL & his LSV encourage the user to understand that he alone is responsible for determining whether any investment, security or strategy is appropriate or suitable for him. And to leave no doubt as to what this means we urge our user to also note our extended Legal Notice.